How long is The Making of the Middle Ages?

The Making of the Middle Ages is approximately 105,671 words. At an average reading pace, it takes about 7 hours to read.

Is The Making of the Middle Ages difficult to read?

The Making of the Middle Ages has a difficulty score of 5.5 out of 10, making it quite demanding. Key factors include vocabulary complexity (7.8/10), sentence structure (7.5/10), abstract concepts (8.2/10).

What genre is The Making of the Middle Ages?

The Making of the Middle Ages is categorized as Essays & Criticism. It was published in 1953 by R. W. Southern.

Is The Making of the Middle Ages worth reading?

The Making of the Middle Ages by R. W. Southern is highly regarded with a literary regard score of 6.1/10. Visit ReadingRate for the full difficulty analysis and reading guide.

When was The Making of the Middle Ages published?

The Making of the Middle Ages was published in 1953 by R. W. Southern.

The Making of the Middle Ages by R. W. Southern

Name: The Making of the Middle Ages
Author: R. W. Southern

Published 1953 · 105,671 words · about 7 hours at an average pace · Essays & Criticism

How hard is The Making of the Middle Ages to read?

The Making of the Middle Ages scores 55 out of 100 for difficulty on ReadingRate, making it quite demanding. The score is a weighted composite of nine measures: four of how hard the prose is to parse, five of how hard the meaning is to extract.

Vocabulary: 78 out of 100: The text employs a rich, academic vocabulary, frequently using specialized historical and ecclesiastical terms such as 'hypotaxis,' 'primogeniture,' 'manumission,' 'solidus,' 'cetology,' and 'Policraticus.' It also incorporates numerous untranslated Latin phrases and references to historical documents and figures, demanding a high level of background knowledge. While not as experimental as 'Finnegans Wake,' its consistent use of precise, often archaic, terminology places it significantly above general literary fiction.
Sentence structure: 75 out of 100: Southern's prose features long, complex sentences with multiple subordinate clauses, often extending over several lines, particularly in analytical passages. The narrative frequently interweaves historical context, specific examples, and interpretive commentary within single sentences, requiring sustained attention to track the argument. This style, while clear, demands more from the reader than typical academic writing, approaching the density seen in works like 'In Search of Lost Time' but without its extreme length.
Abstraction: 82 out of 100: The book operates at a consistently high level of abstraction, analyzing broad historical forces, intellectual movements, and societal structures rather than focusing on concrete events or individual narratives. It frequently discusses concepts like 'the ordering of the Christian life,' 'the bonds of society,' and 'the tradition of thought,' using specific historical instances as illustrations of larger theoretical points. This philosophical and theoretical approach to history is more abstract than 'Brothers Karamazov,' which embeds philosophy within a dramatic narrative.
Information density: 85 out of 100: The text is exceptionally dense with concepts, historical details, and interweaving arguments, presenting a vast amount of information per page without extensive elaboration. It covers political, economic, religious, and social developments across centuries and regions, often introducing multiple figures, events, and their significance in rapid succession. This requires constant attention and synthesis from the reader, akin to the demands of 'Ulysses' in its encyclopedic scope, though without the same linguistic playfulness.
Narrative indirection: 20 out of 100: The author presents historical analysis and arguments directly and explicitly, with no reliance on inference for the reader to grasp the intended meaning. The text is a work of clear exposition, not a fictional narrative employing unreliable narrators or implied subtext, placing it far below anchors like '1984' (35).
Symbolic density: 15 out of 100: As an academic historical text, the book's purpose is literal explanation and analysis of historical events and concepts. While it discusses historical *symbols* (e.g., the significance of dates or rituals), the text itself does not operate on a symbolic or allegorical level to convey its meaning, akin to the directness of 'Diary of a Young Girl' (18).
Ironic distance: 15 out of 100: The author maintains a consistent, serious, and authoritative academic voice throughout the text, aiming for direct and objective historical interpretation. There is no evidence of a gap between what the text states and what the author means, nor any use of satire or unreliable narration, aligning with the direct voice of 'Diary of a Young Girl' (15).
Resolution withholding: 20 out of 100: The book, as a historical survey, aims to provide clear explanations and conclusions within its defined temporal scope, rather than leaving questions ambiguous or unresolved. While it acknowledges ongoing historical developments, the author's arguments and analyses are presented with a clear sense of closure for the topics discussed, much like a 'Beach Read' (25) provides narrative resolution.
Structural complexity: 28 out of 100: The book employs a conventional, logical, and thematic structure common to academic history, with clear chapter divisions and a largely chronological progression. There are no experimental forms, shifts in narrative perspective, or disorienting timeline jumps; contextual references to earlier or later periods are clearly signposted, similar to the linear structure of 'Beach Read' (28).

How The Making of the Middle Ages is regarded

The Making of the Middle Ages holds a literary regard score of 61 out of 100, weighing its place in the canon, its critical reception, its influence on other writers, and the standing of its author. Regard is measured separately from difficulty: a demanding book is not necessarily an admired one.

About the author

R. W. Southern